particracyfandomcom-20200215-history
"Le Chaim" - Aesthetic Party
Ideology - The Aesthetic Democratic Movement The "Le Chaim" - Aesthetic Party sees itself as the main protagonist of the Aesthetic Democratic Movement, a political movement in it's form comparable to other political ideologies like conservatism or socialism. The ideology of the Aesthetic Democratic Movement is based on elements like human being as absolute and inviolable, beauty and art as salvation and ransom of all misery, the state as essential bearer of culture, all forms of belief (including agnosticism and atheism) as matters of personal decision and creative freedom of the individual. The main written work of the Aesthetic Democratic Movement is the book "Aesthetics and politics" by the philosopher Dr. Jossel Schmoychel Edelstein, who was also founder of the "Le Chaim" - Aesthetic Party and therefore theoretically and practically the founder of the whole movement. In "Aesthetics and politics" Edelstein sketches what he calls the "perfectly aesthetic state" based on earnest political and existential considerations. The center of Edelstein's thesis is human being with all it's details and existentials. Human being sets it's priorities itself and therefore determines it's truths and immovable assumptions, emotional and pre-lingual verities that because they stand higher than the world of usurping terms have to be accepted. Every human being is as the room of possibilities it is a fundamental restart and not only but also because of that absolute and a self-evident bearer of intellectual, emotional and religious freedom and gift of creation. This gift of creation above other abilites and powers (intellectual, emotional, matters of belief, social and modifying ablilties, relationships, ...) constitutes human being as such. Where humans gather into communities (Edelstein has three theories why they do that, but he himself doesn't discuss them in detail) they create joint aspects that link the individuals, namely social realtions between each other (above all erotic love, an aspect Edelstein underlines) joint belief, joint culture and joint language. Social relationship and belief do not need linguistic authority, but culture does, because culture is an intrinsic result of individual efforts (according to Edelstein belief is completely private and love in it's ideal form doesn't need more than two, so belief and love do not need a collective linguistic code that is understood by all members of a society). So, following Edelstein's considerations, culture is the main aspect that unites a society, a society is a community of individuals united under one linguistic, artistic or political code (Edelstein factors out how such a code develops) and as such essentially a bearer of culture. Culture is mainly created by art and therefore the aesthetic state Edelstein tries to sketch is based on art and on the advancement of every form of art. The state that knows it's base in the culture as mainly social aspect of community will also appreciate aesthetic perception. According to Edelstein aesthetic perception is every perception that is pre-lingual, that does not mean that it cannot be verbalized afterwards. Aesthetic perception includes not only beauty but also ugliness, grace, loveliness, boredom, in short every perception that, following Edelstein, "is emotional, religious or in other forms pre-lingual and has to be forced into language to become understandable". The aesthetic man is the man who actively and consciously percepts himself and the world around him pre-lingual, the man who only uses his and every other language (Edelstein includes memory and psychological impacts) consideredly and only when necessary. "The consciousness of pre-linguality" is an own chapter in "Aesthetics and Politics". Finally, the aesthetic state is the state that by all measures enables and develops aesthetic perception. This state eliminates the trivial and evil. That doesn't mean that the very individual is excused from his or her individual moral responsibility (in fact as the culture and therefore also the state is based on a community of individuals the aesthetic perfection of the state has to base on individual aesthetic and moral consciousness). It means that the governance clearly sees this aim and supports every effort towards it. Therefore the aesthetic state claims individual freedom and collective beauty... ---- After the party's great ideological crisis under DeBeauforêt's leadership during the civil war many party members and sympathizers began to consequently re-read, question and update the original ideas and intellectual models of Edelstein. It was necessary to rebuild the party ideology and to distinguish it from the "Aesthetic Revolution" the FAAR was sermonizing. (For historical details see below.) Many intelligent and less intelligent reinterpretations, continuations and modernizations of the 160-year old book "Aesthetics and politics" were published. The most influencing was "Infinite Architecture Of Multiplicity. A New Theory Of An Aesthetic Democatic Policy" by Ephraim Chajm Dichter, who followed DeBeauforêt as party leader in 2465. The supporters of Dichter's re-reading and continuation won the struggle for the succession of DeBeauforêt and his failed policy and therefore Dichter's book was declared new party's ideologic fundament. Dichter criticizes Edelstein already for his introduction. It is praiseworthy that Edelstein sets human being as absolute, so Dichter, but Edelstein constricts human being and action, seeing only his own intellectual, emotional and relationship abilities. He forgets carnality. Human being is essentially carnality. If human being is set as absolute, carnality has to be set as invulnerable too. Carnality is not only enabling and medium of cognition and domicile of Eros, Dichter's concept of carnality is a wide term. Carnality is the fact that constitutes human being. And not only human being, even the holy trinity is not complete without the Messiah who combines carnal and divine nature. Carnality enables erotic love and friendship, carnality enables gifts and relationships of being. Carnality is the nature of being "within the world" and humun being is essentially "within the world" (there is no human being "outside" the world). Carnality constitues the being of every imaginable object, because to be means essentially to be cognizable. Carnality is the key that allows the world to be in accordance with the human being and vice versa. But the personal carnality is not identifiable because it is the medium and cause of identication, being and action and therefore lies outside the categories of being. Only erotic love, religion and the beautiful object allow to experience personal carnality. In both human actions (erotic love and religion are actions, not situations or descriptions, according to Dichter) human being opens totally, emotionally, physically and in all other human categories, only when human being is defenseless and vulnerable in every possible relation can a man experience his very own carnality. And only in this state does he feel his dependency and his possibilities, only when he himself is totally vulnerable. The beautiful object is a special object. Human being is essentially understanding being. When experiencing beauty a man does not only experience the object but he does also experience that something is appearing. Normally the fact that something is appearing is ignored as a matter of course. But the aesthetic emotion includes the joyful awareness that something like the beautiful object is possible. The man is experiencing that something is appearing and he is experiencing that the appearing object corresponds and answers his own being, that the object fits. The second point Dichter criticizes is the extreme short-sighted concentration on what Edelstein calls the "subject". This, so Dichter, is ego-logy. It ignores the fellow man. The fellow man can never be understood with such a blinded concentration on the subject. In fact everyone is morally responsible for all his fellow men. Human action and experience is not only surrounded by "Yous", it builds it's existence on the fellow man. But still the "You" can't be reached, it is an asymptote. We can only converge, but we will always fail at the cruel infinity of the asymptote. The "You" is an asymptote and therefore it can never be reached, it is an unreachable aim. That is specifically visible in erotic love and in religion. The loving man as much as the believing man can never reach his beloved or believed (at least not in this world, maybe one of the reasons of lovers' or believers' otherwordly hopes). But still we are driven by hope and by our moral bond. The beautiful however can be reached, even more it does not have to be reached. The beautiful object already fits and answers. Dichter accepts most of Edelstein's thoughts on language but he adds two more aspects to Edelstein's analysis. Firstly he claims that language is action and secondly he claims that language is command. Language is not description but it has essential social functions and roles. Dichter concentrates on actions that are explicitly completed or performed by speaking. When a man says "I promise" he does not describe, he acts, the promise is performed by language. And he acts socially, his promise has a social role. in fact every kind of speaking or writing is 1. action and 2. fulfilling a social role. Depending on how language is defined, Dichter says, one could be tempted to claim that every action is language. Secondly, Dichter says being slightly inconsistent, language is not information or communication, it is command. Language does not only determine possible expressions, it dictates what a man can answer, what he should expect, what he should be concerned by. When someone acively uses language in a conversation or in the media, he acts according to the commands of language and the "consumers" of his language product have to obey the language regime, expecting what language commands, answering or acting just like commanded by language. After this two arguments Edelstein's pre-linguality has to be re-read. Something outside of any form of language has to be 1. ouside of (at least lingual) action and sociality and 2. outside of the command structure. That means the pre-lingual or non-lingual perception is an "egocentric, lethargic, aesthetic game" without moral responsibility or understanding of the fellow man. That is, so Dichter, pure ignorant ego-logy and decadence. Therefore Dichter concludes that the commanding structure of language is the commanding structure of moral responsibility, language makes it possible to at least converge the asymptote. Pre- or non-linguality is not desirable. After Dichter has destroyed Edelstein's concept of pre-linguality the space has to be filled with another desirable aim that unlike the "You" actually can be reached. That is multiplicity. The world is multiplicity and every form of thinking that wants to concentrate the multiplicity in one approach or declaration is false and dangerous. One of the best examples of multiplicity is space. Space doesn't mean spiritless place or site and space doesn't mean mathematical space. According to Dichter space is living space and territory, for animals and for men. Space has it's own spirit, space can be loaded up, space is a product of conscious and unconscious needs and actions. Space is constituted by carnality. The "architecture of space" is the possibility and the duty of the political space or state. It is this architecture the state can alterate and regulate. When the state tries to organize the space according to aesthetic, human and moral categories (Dichter accepts most of Edelstein's aesthetic arguments), meaning if the state advances charm and emotion, if it enables the joyful experience that something is appearing and that something beautiful is possible, then the state corresponds, then the state answers the human being, then the state fits... "Le Chaim" - The Party The "Le Chaim" - Aesthetic Party is an intellectual and pacifist political association based on the ideas of the Aesthetic Democratic Movement. It has been influencing the political scene in Hutori for many years now and can count on many loyal voters, mainly from the intellectual upper class, the yewish minority and university students. The party's structure is quite incoherent except of the party's leading committee consisting of the party leader, the chief ideologist, the head of the party's office for external communication and the professional consultants, who are also the candidates for the ministries. Since the leadership of Joshua Roth the party has it's own art foundation named tacheles.art.foundation, who's director and financial manager do not sit in the leading commitee but have big influence on decision-making processes particularly concerning questions of art or education. The foundation encourages young and critical artists and their works, organizes travelling exhibitions, concerts of contemporary music, panel discussions and readings of new literature. The foundation's aim is to make room and financial aid available to young and talented artists. The party also engages in international peace projects and supports cultural exchange... From Edelstein to Brandtwein - The Party's Political History After his book "Aesthetics and Politics" had been published in 2305 and he was encouraged to actively fight for his ideas by students and colleagues Dr. Jossel Schmoychel Edelstein founded the "Le Chaim" - Aesthetic Party in 2310. From the very beginning on he had many supporters and under his leadership the party surprisingly won it's first elections and afterwards led a government consisting of three parties successfully bringing the idea of an aesthetic state into action. After the great loss of votes at the following elections 2318 Dr. Edelstein decided to retire and was followed by the actor and director Schloyme Bloomberg. In 2342 after many years of prosperity for country and party Bloomberg died after short and severe illness. The ideas of Dr. Edelstein had spread fast and "Aesthetics and Politics" was much discussed not only in philosophical seminars. The mourning party chose the young man of letters Dr. Herschel Katz as Bloomberg's successor. Dr. Katz reminded the party's conservative ideologists of the ideal of the party as a dynamic movement, always reacting on and acting in the contemporary time, an ideal that seemed to have been forgotten under the last years of Bloomberg's leadership. With the election of Dr. Katz for party leader also an internal controversy between the old elites and the forging ahead young talents was settled, leaving behind a new party as young movement of active artists and intellectuals. But the new orientation was made without the people. The elections in 2353 brought the greatest loss of votes for the "Le Chaim"-Aesthetic Party in the party's history. Herschel Katz and his supporters of the party's young liberal wing understood the message and stepped down or completely left the party. Now again the old conservative elites took over, new party leader was Samuel Aaron Ashkenazy, a most respected philosopher and poet, known for his restrictive policy in questions of moral or civil liberties. In 2371 Ashkenazy, aged 85, retired. His funeral a few years later demonstrated how he had inspired not only his own party. The party had been constantly strong under his leadership. Ashkenazy's successor was Moische Mandelbaum, a student of Ashkenazy who continued the policy of his tutor adding a stronger social touch. The following years the party had to lead an opposition more of less powerless in view of the right wing majority. Still these years also had positive aspects e.g. the first attempt to create a continent united in peace and friendship within the Union Of Macon. In 2385 after many years again the party won elections. Shortly before the building of a government with involvement of the "Le Chaim" - Aesthetic party had solved a governmental crisis, the lying-scandal of prime minister Barnwood (CUP), after which the right wing coalition had broken apart. But even with the party the strongest in parliament it was impossible to continue the governmental coalition. Several party disorganizations had left the "Le Chaim" - Aesthetic Party as the only rather left wing party in the nation. Some religious parties (above all the UFD) now established a state religion and endangered the secular state which forced the party to become a stronghold of secularization, adding another facet, namely a strong secular one to the party's ideology. In 2392, shortly after Hutori had left the Union Of Macon that had become a pure militarist alliance, Moische Mandelbaum handed the party leadership over to the young and talented journalist Rebecca Zuckermann. In the following years the nation was confronted with a cold war declared on Hutori by the nations remaining in the practically dead Union of Macon, a war in which not a shoot was fired. Still instead of working towards peace the agressors didn't want to see Hutori's withdrawal was legal. A phase of diplomatic deadlock followed. The party never, not even in times of serious militant threats, left their pacifist ideology. Zuckermanns political course was criticized from the very beginning on but the fact that Moische Mandelbaum had trusted in her abilities retarded open mutiny. After the general elections in 2405 the party was confronted with the worst election result in the party's history, being now the weakest political power in parliament. Even before Zuckermann could step down the angry party elected Joshua Roth, a young painter and impresario, new party leader. Roth totally reformed the party's organization structures and led the party's ideology back to the original ideas of Dr. Edelstein, everything with the strong support of the shocked party. And Roth was successful. In 2417 the party again won elections and in the following years it led a successful government. In 2420 Roth had to retire because of medical contition reasons. He suffered from a kind of bone marrow desease. His successor was Paul Abraham Eisenberg, an independant gentleman and art collector. Eiseberg was not undisputable. Jossel Sommertag, head of the party's art foundation, the tacheles.art.foundation, that had been founded by Roth, accused Eisenberg of being decadent and a superficial dandy and depraved rich asthete. After the party had to face their worst result since Joshua Roth in 2429 an open power struggle erupted within the party. The young artistic fraction under Sommertag accused Eisenberg of betraying the main ideas of the movement and after a crucial vote the party's pragmatic wing retreated. New party leader was Pierre Rosenstiehl, former manager of the national art galery, a confidant of Jossel Sommertag, who decided to stay in his position as leader of the tacheles.art.foundation. The party's political course changed from rather pragmatic to philosophical-idealistic, come critics called the new course a "pseudo-religion and cult". Nevertheless the party was quite successfull during the following years. In 2442 Rosenstiehl, Sommertag and nearly the whole party executive retired to make place for the young, talented and visionary generation. The party's ideology had lost a bit of it's highly idealistic touch during the 13 years of Rosenstiehls, or as some observers declared actually Sommertag's leadership. This peaceful generation change left Leyzer Chaim Brandtwein, professor for philosophy at Ihmetellä and former party's chief ideologist, as new party leader. And again the party was leading successful government coalitions. At the general election in 2452 the party under Prime Minister Brandtwein lost many votes and the first place. Brandtwein was confronted with harsh criticism by the party's conservative wing, conisting of intellectuals and businessmen rather ignored by the party's leadership during the last years. To aviod an open power struggle Brandtwein and his critics agreed on an equal distribution of the seats in the party's leading committee. Brandtwein himself could convince the party's base that he should stay party leader, simply because of the government coalition the party could continue under Brandtwein as Prime Minister. Brandtwein was forced onto the defensive. The very important positions of Chief Iedologist and Head Of The External Communication were filled with critics of the party leader, Pierre Aleph DeBeauforêt, expert for education, was appointed party's chief ideologist and Benjamin Judt, a professional pianist, was appointed leader of the external communication. Also some of the positions of professional consultants were filled with Brandtwein-critics. As a consequence of this agreement the party's conservative and Brandtwein-critic wing was controlling seven of the thirteen seats of the party's leading committee, only six were filled with Brandtwein's confidants. Therefore the critics could overrule their own party leader. The members of the government were all supporters of Brandtwein, so that after 2452 Brandtwein was unchallenged authority within the party's government team, but party leader only by the mercy of his critics. This couldn't last for long. After the leading committee decided to end the current government coalition against the will of Brandtwein, he and his team stepped down not only as government officials but also as party officials. New party leader was DeBeauforêt and the party's policy finally turned to conservative. The following years a bloody civil war arised between the party and the God's And The King's Fighters party (GKF) who's policy had changed to militant communist and who's leaders accused Le Chaim of betrayal and inhuman capitalism. The party radicalized and a party militia was founded, the First Army For The Aesthetic Revolution (FAAR). Actually the FAAR's function and official justification was the protection of high party officials and party centers against criminals and terrorists. Soon the FAAR and the "Royal Guards" of GKF began to commit bloody attacks and massacres on high party officials and innocent supporters of the other side. After the Royal Guards had killed Benjamin Judt in a bomb attack a series of terrible vengeances from both sides started. One of the victims of the spiral of violence was Leyzer Chaim Brandtwein who was killed after he had criticized both sides of the conflict, others were minor leaders of the FAAR or the Royal Guards or innocent supporters of one or the other party. After both party militias were officially banned they continued to battle underground, where they also slowly slipped away from the supervision and control of their party leaders. After some more years DeBeauforêt was nothing more than a powerless wax figure. Behind the scenes three groups were battling, every one of them wanting to succeed DeBeauforêt as party leader. The first group, the supporters of DeBeauforêt were marginalized soon. The second group, FAAR sympathizers supporting the "Aesthetic Revolution" withing the party's inner circle, had more and more problems as the FAAR's attacks became more and more inhuman. In 2465 finally the third group, mostly young intellectuals and artists, had won the struggle and conquered not only the party's art foundation, but also the party's leadership. New party leader was Ephraim Chajm Dichter, the tacheles.art.foundation was led by Moses Friedman. Dichter had initiated a wide re-reading and modernization of Edelstein's "Aesthetics and politics" and the ideology of the Aesthetic Democratic Movement. It had been necessary to rebuild the party ideology and to distinguish it from the "Aesthetic Revolution" the FAAR was sermonizing. With the election of Dichter for party leader also this discussion was ended, Dichter's book "Infinite Architecture Of Multiplicity. A New Theory Of An Aesthetic Democatic Policy" was declared new party's ideological base and the party leadership distanced themselves from the FAAR and all their actions and ideas. Category: Parties in Hutori